Updates will be a bit slow at first due to final exams, but I figured I could show you what's up so far. Remember that once all the lists are filled in, Henrik will add additional formulas to make the list more accurate to how it will be in the next AM update.

BleuPanda wrote:I'm going to be so confused if LCD Soundsystem ends up with an album in the top 5 and nothing in the top 10 songs...where is the love for How Do You Sleep and Tonite?

The way I see it, there is no clear choice for the highlight of American Dream. I've seen call the police, how do you sleep and tonite all getting votes here and there, including in lists that are not in the spreadsheet yet.

Really surprised to see Boys at number 3 right now, but that has a lot to do with NME and Guardian ranking it at #2. I think it will be able to hold on to the top 10 but it should slip down a little I think as other lists pour in.

BleuPanda wrote:I'm going to be so confused if LCD Soundsystem ends up with an album in the top 5 and nothing in the top 10 songs...where is the love for How Do You Sleep and Tonite?

It's definitely odd for an artist who's song ranking is 50 spots higher than their album ranking. I never really felt a monster single on this album though, and This is Happening had way less of a song splash than their previous two albums. Maybe they're simply becoming an album band?

BleuPanda wrote:I'm going to be so confused if LCD Soundsystem ends up with an album in the top 5 and nothing in the top 10 songs...where is the love for How Do You Sleep and Tonite?

It's definitely odd for an artist who's song ranking is 50 spots higher than their album ranking. I never really felt a monster single on this album though, and This is Happening had way less of a song splash than their previous two albums. Maybe they're simply becoming an album band?

"becoming"

There's literally a song on "This Is Happening" that directly addresses your point lol.

BleuPanda wrote:I'm going to be so confused if LCD Soundsystem ends up with an album in the top 5 and nothing in the top 10 songs...where is the love for How Do You Sleep and Tonite?

It's definitely odd for an artist who's song ranking is 50 spots higher than their album ranking. I never really felt a monster single on this album though, and This is Happening had way less of a song splash than their previous two albums. Maybe they're simply becoming an album band?

"becoming"

There's literally a song on "This Is Happening" that directly addresses your point lol.

I'm pretty sure LCD Soundsystem has always been both, only at a disadvantage in the album rank due to their relatively small number of albums. But the three albums they do have are all the way in the top 400, and it looks like American Dream will likely join them.

I feel like they could be in a Lemonade situation, but where Lemonade had "Formation" attached kind of like "A Day in the Life" was on Sgt. Pepper's, American Dream didn't have one song designed to stand out from the rest; "Call the Police" is getting the lead single advantage but I doubt that sticks with time. I'm sure with the album receiving as much acclaim as it is, we'll see it have something like an "Idioteque" on the end of decade lists - Kid A being another album that pretty much let time decide which song was the big hit. A lot of critics are mentioning LCD Soundsystem songs; the problem is they're rarely the same one.

Not sure if this is the appropriate forum for this post, but I crosschecked the song list artists vs. the album list artists and found these spelling/format discrepancies (excluding typical variations for featured artists):

Setherex: Thanks for doing the Spotify playlist again! It’s no rush but when do you think it will be ready? (I figured it would be better to ask than to continue checking several times per day if you have added it to your post above.)

Sweepstakes Ron: Thanks for your work and good luck with the exams! Do not feel pressured to make a spreadsheet update!

Everyone you meet fights a battle you know nothing about. Be kind. Always.

Based on how well "Redbone" is doing on the lists that it has appeared on this year. I have a feeling it would have been number one for 2016 if it were released earlier last year or it would have been number one for 2017 if it was actually released this year. I have a feeling this song is going to be near the top of a lot of decade end lists.

Henrik wrote:Setherex: Thanks for doing the Spotify playlist again! It’s no rush but when do you think it will be ready? (I figured it would be better to ask than to continue checking several times per day if you have added it to your post above.)

Haha, sorry to keep you guessing and checking. It's up! Updated through the top 181.

I'd be surprised if Stormzy stays that high. He's largely ignored in the American press (sadly, so's Wolf Alice, I think). Also surprised by the lack of love for Foo Fighters. I thought that was a great album myself, and the critics seemed to like it too, but it hasn't gotten much love.

On the bright side, I think Japandroids are showing up more.

Music is a world within itself, with a language we all understand - Sir Duke (1976)

Henrik wrote:Setherex: Thanks for doing the Spotify playlist again! It’s no rush but when do you think it will be ready? (I figured it would be better to ask than to continue checking several times per day if you have added it to your post above.)

Haha, sorry to keep you guessing and checking. It's up! Updated through the top 181.

Thanks Setherex!

Everyone you meet fights a battle you know nothing about. Be kind. Always.

Glad to see Praying and Everything Now jump into the top 30, and that Drew Barrymore is close. Surprised Los Ageless isn't doing better. I think it's much better than New York. There are some other great secondary songs that I think are being overlooked because of another standout song on their album.

Arcade Fire - Creature Comfort (not on any USA/UK lists in this update, although I see it barely made Pop Matters)
Father John Misty - Total Entertainment Forever
The War on Drugs - Nothing to Find
Wolf Alice - Formidable Cool
The xx - Say Something Loving; Replica
Kendrick Lamar - Pride

For Wolf Alice, Kendrick Lamar, and The War on Drugs, I liked those songs way better than the critics' top choices, so what do I know. I'm definitely having a disconnect with most of the rap choices this year, so I'll need to come around on some of the merits of this movement.

I'm surprised Laura Marling has been largely snubbed. Wild Fire and Nothing, Not Nearly are fantastic.

Am I the only one who thinks this is probably the worst top 10 we've ever had? Bodak Yellow is the second best song of the year? Sorry, but I just don't see it. And I don't understand all the love for XO TOUR Llif3 and Mask Off either. They're alright, but to me they're maybe top 50 songs of the year - not top 5.

Boys is catchy, but even calling that a top 10 song of the year seems like a major stretch to me. And Selena Gomez is able to crack the top 10 by taking the bass line from a Talking Head's song and making it significantly worse?

I can totally get behind HUMBLE., Green Light, DNA., Chanel and Slide though!

Future Critic wrote:Am I the only one who thinks this is probably the worst top 10 we've ever had? Bodak Yellow is the second best song of the year? Sorry, but I just don't see it. And I don't understand all the love for XO TOUR Llif3 and Mask Off either. They're alright, but to me they're maybe top 50 songs of the year - not top 5.

Boys is catchy, but even calling that a top 10 song of the year seems like a major stretch to me. And Selena Gomez is able to crack the top 10 by taking the bass line from a Talking Head's song and making it significantly worse?

I can totally get behind HUMBLE., Green Light, DNA., Chanel and Slide though!

I agree. I think the only outstanding song in the top 10 is Green Light. I think XO Tour Llif3 and DNA. are good, Bad Liar and Slide are pretty good, and I haven't been able to get into the other ones, especially not Mask Off.

Future Critic wrote:Am I the only one who thinks this is probably the worst top 10 we've ever had? Bodak Yellow is the second best song of the year? Sorry, but I just don't see it. And I don't understand all the love for XO TOUR Llif3 and Mask Off either. They're alright, but to me they're maybe top 50 songs of the year - not top 5.

Boys is catchy, but even calling that a top 10 song of the year seems like a major stretch to me. And Selena Gomez is able to crack the top 10 by taking the bass line from a Talking Head's song and making it significantly worse?

I can totally get behind HUMBLE., Green Light, DNA., Chanel and Slide though!

It's a pretty bad top 10, but there are at least 4 songs here I really like.

Every year I have less in common with the critics. (Just a sign of aging, I suppose - I am about to turn 47.) This year, however, will be the first year I don't give a single song in the top 10 as high as a 7. (Though I do give most a 6, which is my rating for when I kinda like a song but it has no chance at my year-end top 200.) Here's how I'd rank/rate them personally...

Future Critic wrote:Am I the only one who thinks this is probably the worst top 10 we've ever had? Bodak Yellow is the second best song of the year? Sorry, but I just don't see it. And I don't understand all the love for XO TOUR Llif3 and Mask Off either. They're alright, but to me they're maybe top 50 songs of the year - not top 5.

Boys is catchy, but even calling that a top 10 song of the year seems like a major stretch to me. And Selena Gomez is able to crack the top 10 by taking the bass line from a Talking Head's song and making it significantly worse?

I can totally get behind HUMBLE., Green Light, DNA., Chanel and Slide though!

I just think that the critics are trying to award the most popular songs with an “edgy” sound and discrediting amazing artist that are so obviously better than the ones they choose. They don’t take the time to look for and listen to non-american or new artists, which is probably their job as music critics (to recommend and introduce new artist to a wider audience).

And don’t mistake me, i’m not saying that they should only award new artists as you can see from my list but i just think it’s pretty disgusting that they completely ignore artist from the past decade that have been breaking new ground with their projects (like Death Grips, Big Krit, Ibibio Sound Machine, SOPHIE, Iglooghost, Oh Sees, Ghost, Nails, clipping, Oxbow) and not to mention how they completely ignore Grime, Metal and Latin Genres

I mean, at the end of the day, do you really think that Cardi B, Future, Selena Gomez or Lil Uzi Vert deserve a top ten spot with so many ground breaking artist out there??

Also, after Tonspion listed the original version of "On Hold" and the Jamie xx remix as separate entries, I decided to separate them on the spreadsheet as well. I don't want this to be a permanent thing, and I think I already figured out the solution, but I'll cross that bridge later, because I want to see how far the remix can get on it's own.

Many thanks for the update, Sweepstakes Ron. I hope, everything's fine with your examina. But I think you didn't notice the list of laut.de, which is published and posted since a long time. What about the lists of ANTENNA 3, 1live and Visions, which are all eligible?

Federico wrote:Many thanks for the update, Sweepstakes Ron. I hope, everything's fine with your examina. But I think you didn't notice the list of laut.de, which is published and posted since a long time. What about the lists of ANTENNA 3, 1live and Visions, which are all eligible?

They are new sources and needs to be indicated in the checklist section

Federico wrote:Many thanks for the update, Sweepstakes Ron. I hope, everything's fine with your examina. But I think you didn't notice the list of laut.de, which is published and posted since a long time. What about the lists of ANTENNA 3, 1live and Visions, which are all eligible?

It just seemed like time for an update. I'll make sure to get those lists in for the next update.

"Music is powerful, man. It speaks to a primal pit in our brains. It makes anyone want to get up and get their knees going!"
— Jake the Dog

Hi there. Thanks a lot for creating this spreadsheet – it's a really useful way of discovering great songs that I may have missed last year.

I'm a little confused by some of the maths, though. From what I can tell from a quick look over the formulae, the final song on a list receives the same score as the final song on any other list, regardless of how long the list is. So, for example, Something Just Like This by The Chainsmokers was named the 50th best song of 2017 in Uproxx's Top 50, and it therefore has approximately the same score as On + Off by Maggie Rogers, which Pitchfork named the 100th best song of 2017 in their Top 100.

Doesn't this mean that the spreadsheet is biased towards longer lists? The song that Pitchfork named as the 50th best of 2017 (Show You the Way by Thundercat) would have received twice the score of Something Just Like This, even though they were both at the same position (number 50) on their respective lists.

If you follow that through to its logical conclusion, that would then mean that, for example, being named the third best song on Reactor 105.7's list (106 entries long) is worth almost 11 times more than being named the third best song on The Music's list (only 10 entries long), heavily biasing the spreadsheet in Reactor 105.7's favour. This seems a little unintuitive to me. Surely a song's position on a list should be worth the same score irrespective of how long the list is, or how many other songs are beneath it?

Anyway, those are just my thoughts. It's your spreadsheet, so you can compile it however you want. Apologies if I'm reading the maths completely wrong and misrepresenting your calculations. Thanks again for the great work!

Beatsurrender24 wrote:Hi there. Thanks a lot for creating this spreadsheet – it's a really useful way of discovering great songs that I may have missed last year.

I'm a little confused by some of the maths, though. From what I can tell from a quick look over the formulae, the final song on a list receives the same score as the final song on any other list, regardless of how long the list is. So, for example, Something Just Like This by The Chainsmokers was named the 50th best song of 2017 in Uproxx's Top 50, and it therefore has approximately the same score as On + Off by Maggie Rogers, which Pitchfork named the 100th best song of 2017 in their Top 100.

Doesn't this mean that the spreadsheet is biased towards longer lists? The song that Pitchfork named as the 50th best of 2017 (Show You the Way by Thundercat) would have received twice the score of Something Just Like This, even though they were both at the same position (number 50) on their respective lists.

If you follow that through to its logical conclusion, that would then mean that, for example, being named the third best song on Reactor 105.7's list (106 entries long) is worth almost 11 times more than being named the third best song on The Music's list (only 10 entries long), heavily biasing the spreadsheet in Reactor 105.7's favour. This seems a little unintuitive to me. Surely a song's position on a list should be worth the same score irrespective of how long the list is, or how many other songs are beneath it?

Anyway, those are just my thoughts. It's your spreadsheet, so you can compile it however you want. Apologies if I'm reading the maths completely wrong and misrepresenting your calculations. Thanks again for the great work!

The problem is, if you were to simply make every position worth the same no matter the size of the list, it harms a lot of songs that don't make smaller lists simply due to lack of space. I believe the main purpose to having such a scale is so that not appearing on a list is generally the same value. I'm not sure what the numbers in this case are, but imagine a scale where rank 1-100 were given 100-1 points depending on their rank. In a list with 100 songs, the difference between being #100 and #101 is essentially 1 point. If a list only contains 10 songs, the difference between #10 and #11 would be 91 points! That would give a lot of weight towards lists that frankly give us less information to actually work with, and gives an unfair advantage to those few songs that manage to make short lists. The issue isn't raw value as much as the difference assigned between positions.

Interesting. So longer lists allocate way more points than shorter lists - per song in addition to the larger number of songs. I didn't realize that. I can see the pros and cons of both approaches. I have a similar project I've mentioned before, and I initially went with Sweepstakes Ron's approach before switching to Beatsurrender24's approach. But I just don't give any points to songs that don't appear on a list, which makes it a little different than the problem BleuPanda mentions about assigning an appropriate amount of points to songs that didn't make the cut.

andyd1010 wrote:Interesting. So longer lists allocate way more points than shorter lists - per song in addition to the larger number of songs. I didn't realize that. I can see the pros and cons of both approaches. I have a similar project I've mentioned before, and I initially went with Sweepstakes Ron's approach before switching to Beatsurrender24's approach. But I just don't give any points to songs that don't appear on a list, which makes it a little different than the problem BleuPanda mentions about assigning an appropriate amount of points to songs that didn't make the cut.

Well, it's not like anyone's assigning points to songs that don't appear on a list; the problem is how much higher than zero the songs that are on the list are getting. Being #3 on a list of the top 100 songs is different than being #3 on a top 10. In the end, what really matters is the point difference, not the total value of points. So, in my example distribution, every song ranked outside the top 100 would be 98 points less than song #3; but there are 97 songs that have smaller differences! The problem is that smaller lists have an additional 90 songs that we gain no information on. To me, with a top 100 list, I can go ahead and agree that the point distribution between an imagined #101 and #200 would be so small that it wouldn't matter; but for a top 10 list, I think the imagined difference between the non-existent #11 and #101 does matter. Somewhere out there is a song that should be getting 90 points that isn't (if I'm using 100 as the ideal size).

The easiest solution is to lower that size difference; it's messy, but you need some method that accommodates for different list sizes. In other words, it's better to treat every unranked song as #11 if the list only has 10 songs. Why should they be treated as #101, other than the fact that other lists go to 100? That's essentially what using a flat rate suggests. A flat rate statistically gives more weight to smaller lists; which I hope we would agree is a bad thing, right?

In a way, you are always assigning every song points; zero is a value. It's all relative.

Of course, this is just me giving my own analysis for why there should be different weighing based off the size of a list; Henrik likely has entirely different reasons.

I made a new topic yesterday in the EOY 2017 thread called "Ideal Point Distribution for Lists of Different Lengths" in case anyone wants to discuss the topic further. I didn't want the discussion to totally take over this thread, but I am interested figuring out the best system, since it's a topic that will be relevant to many lists used on the site and on the forum.

Sweepstakes Ron, can you please post or PM me a list of the sources you've added/are planning to add to the spreadsheet since the last posted update? I want to make sure I add the album lists from those sources (if they have them) to my spreadsheet as well. Thanks!